2 Samuel 16:9,11 - "Why should this dead dog curse my lord the king? Let me go over, I pray thee, and take off his head...let him alone, and let him curse; for the Lord hath bidden him."

Matthew 7:15 - “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.

Matthew 24:11 - “…and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people.”

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

David Barton at FBC Jax: Our Declaration of Independence is Nothing More Than a Listing of Sermons - and Other Such Nonsense

"Historians have documented that every single right set forth in the Declaration of Independence had been preached from the American pulpit prior to 1763. You know what that means? It means the Declaration of Independence is nothing more than a listing of all the sermons we had been hearing in church for the 20 years leading up to the American Revolution." David Barton's Revisionist History Lesson at FBC Jax, 9/11/11-------------------------

Last week Karl Giberson and Randall J. Stephens published an article entitled "The Evangelical Rejection of Reason" which points out how men like Ken Ham and David Barton - and those pastors who promote them in their churches - have helped create a "parallel culture" in Christianity that is extremely rigid and anti-intellectual.

In other words, more and more, to be a good soldier in the American evangelical army you have to check your brains at the church door. You have to believe special versions of American history, and you have to discard scientific evidence concerning the true age of planet Earth. This is why more and more of our youth are bolting from church, according to George Barna, as young people see churches becoming more antagonistic to science.

David Barton is a perfect example of how churches like FBC Jax are bringing in kooks, presenting them as experts who have special biblical and historical knowledge, and causing people to scratch their heads as they try to reconcile what they hear from the pulpit with what they learn through science and sound history. No different really, than a preacher bringing in Ergun Caner to tell stories of his days growing up in Turkey watching American television.

If you don't believe me about the kookiness that is being told in pulpits, get a load of this video of "historian" David Barton - the first part is from his "sermon" at FBC Jax on September 11, 2011, followed by a discussion with Kenneth Copeland that you're sure to think is a Saturday Night Live parody skit.

And who is aiding the likes of Ham and Barton to get their version of history out to the peeps so they can get the deeper knowledge on things like the age of the earth and "true" American history? Why, of course, mega churches such as FBC Jax and Bellevue Baptist Church! Mac Brunson gave David Barton the FBC Jax pulpit on 9/11 and soon after Mac gave his pulpit to Ken Ham and friends for a Sunday morning and Sunday night Young-Earth fest.

David Barton heads up "WallBuilders", which is dedicated to the education of people about the Christian roots of our nation, and to help shape public policy. He is a pseudo-historian, and many Christian historians call into question his lack of historical integrity and ridiculous assertions about the nature of our founding documents. For instance, he asserts that 52 of the 55 signers of the Declaration of Independence were "evangelical Christians". He has gone on the record saying that Glen Beck, a Mormon, is a Christian, and Barton believes some very, very nutting things about "principalities" having control over certain governments - and that HE can sense them.

Ken Ham and his Answers in Genesis have built an entire ministry around the concept that the earth is only10,000 years old, and their view of the earth's age leaves no room for a believer to consider one of the Old Earth Creationist theories that many Christians believe is supported by scientific evidence. For Ham, to believe in an OEC theory is to be anti-Christian and anti-Bible. Ham says:

"Believing in a relatively “young Earth” (i.e., only a few thousands of years old, which we accept) is a consequence of accepting the authority of the Word of God as an infallible revelation from our omniscient Creator."Ken Ham

So to not believe in a young earth would necessarily mean you are undercutting the authority of the Bible and its infallibility. This is the division that Ken Ham and those who push him and his beliefs in their churches are creating. The Wartburg Watch has some excellent articles on Ken Ham and the damage he is inflicting on Christianity.

Too bad that preachers can't just preach the bible in their pulpits. They now have to bring in their friends as "experts" on history and Islam and paleontology and have created a Christian sub-culture that requires Christians to permanently remove their thinking caps.

39 comments:

Anonymous
said...

Yea,Kenneth Copeland,He really is a good one. Why not have him some Sunday night when ole "mac" is away earning extra money to get his grass cut. Why Ken will even fly in om his 20 million dollar new Cessna Citation. He'll probably give yall a discount on the fuel he has to buy but lookout for that honorarium because I hear it will be plenty steep.

These guys want more and more power. They can best explain the Bible, and they are God's representatives. So of course they should have the power and a lot of our money. I mean they have the real truth on all these subjects and represent God himself. How much more powerful could you possibly be?

I give up. I think we should revere them as Men of God and hang on their every word and give them as much money as possible. They will help us get rid of those pesky principalities hovering over houses and government buildings that are keeping God from doing what he wants to do. Wait a minute....

If you want to build on the Ergun line of thought, you might want to research how many quotes Barton has fabricated. I had a history prof in a PhD seminar that told us that he was able to identify a number of fabricated quotes or lines that were taken out of context. Barton is not a trained historian and is dangerous because people consider him an expert.

I think Ham's ministry has caught on because there are so many today that ignore the Bible altogether when it comes to the Creation and other things. It's take it literally with no exceptions, or leave it open to interpretation, which leads to people taking a lot of liberties with the truth.

Barton, on the other hand, is NUTS. But the two who wrote that op-ed are arrogant elitists who only cling to the parts of the Bible they like, or that fit their liberal agendas. They are no better than Barton.

Off Topic- Folio Weekly has included Mac Brunson in the current issue, as one of the scariest people in Jacksonville. (Halloween) While I've only seen the cover at this point, it's heart breaking to realize that quite possibly I will agree more with this liberal rag than the church I once dearly loved.

I have read that Barton has a degree in Physical Education, and that he has also said that fifty-plus of the signers of the Declaration had seminary degrees. He knew this because many colleges at the time were called "seminaries," a term with the same meaning as "college." For instance, even though East Florida Seminary was a predessor to the University of Florida, it had nothing to do with theology.

Thank you, FBCJ Watchdog, for your revelations. Although not a Baptist (I am an LCMS Lutheran), I follow your blog everyday and have relatives who are SBC, including one who was formerly very prominently involved at FBCJ. LCMS has had its share of problems over the years which were very similar to those in the SBC.

David Barton’s stance is easier to understand once you realize he’s heavily involved in the seven mountains dominiomist group. See http://lefthemispheres.blogspot.com/2011/06/theocracy-watch-seven-mountains.html and google for more info

I am flabbergasted to realize that Ken Ham's Young Earth position does not receive your complete and sincere support. It is truly remarkable that you still contend that there is "scientific evidence" to the contrary. You need to wise up. Science demands evolution to exclude God. The theory of evolution is void of evidence. Aging data has been fabricated from so far back that the entire scientific community quotes it like it is fact when it is just a collection of repeated wishful exaggerated estimates. Shame on you for not supporting Ken Ham. It is a matter of faith and it is a matter of believing the Bible is the infallible WORD OF GOD.

"Off Topic- Folio Weekly has included Mac Brunson in the current issue, as one of the scariest people in Jacksonville. (Halloween) While I've only seen the cover at this point, it's heart breaking to realize that quite possibly I will agree more with this liberal rag than the church I once dearly loved."

October 26, 2011 10:36 AM==============================For those of you that don't know "Folio Weekly" is free newspaper distributed throughout the City & the Beaches. For some time we have informed you Brunson has a terrible reputation in Jacksonville & this is just more proof that our community has no respect for him - he needs to move on.

Bill, I'm flabbergasted that you're flabbergasted. I wasn't there when the earth was formed. I don't know if it was 10000 years ago or a million years ago. The bible doesn't say. But you've helped make my point perfectly. The age of the earth has been made a primary doctine against which one's devotion to God and the Bible is measured. How sad.

What about the principalities ruling over mega-preachers who believe the Declaration of Independence is nothing more than a collection of sermons?

This guy is LETHAL!!!

Teaching people that freedoms and God-inspired rules for our country are outdated or irrelevant. Next thing you know preachers will be saying how we need to incorporate Sharia law into society and Muslim beliefs into Christianity..Er, wait..they're already doing that...

I guess I'm incapable of an objective view here because I am pretty much a "young Earth" type....but I certainly agree that Barton is a loon. It just strikes me that you're comparing apples to oranges. There are a number of sane, Godly folks who eschew the Gap Theory, etc. There is no sane, scholarly historian who supports the revisionist views of Barton-Beck and their ilk.

Ken Ham might be a one-trick pony but I don't question his salvation or his sincerity. You say:

"The age of the earth has been made a primary doctine against which one's devotion to God and the Bible is measured. How sad."

Amen! It's equally sad when anyone questions Ham's devotion to God because of his views on the subject. I do not know if Ham has made that (in his mind) a 'primary doctrine'....if so, he's wrong. Clearly you and I have differing views on this but it is about as important as if we disagreed on one-cup communion or something, imo.

I agree that David Barton can be off base on some of his assertions, but he is by no means a non-intellectual. I'd rather have him teach my children American History rather than the progressives that are teaching a revised American history (if they are teaching American history at all) in the taxpayer funded American public education system, which includes colleges and universities. As far as Ken Ham, he is no non-intellectual as well. It's interesting that he never discredits those he disagrees with, even out and out evolutionists and athiests, as being non-intellectuals. He even compliments them on their intellectualism on many occasions. He's not rude nor ignorant toward them, like many are toward him. He disagrees with them, and tries to show them where they are wrong, from his perspective. Anything wrong with that? No. He believes strongly in the young earth teaching, and strongly defends the totality of all scripture as the Christians only rule or guide for faith and practice. Again, I would rather have him teach my children, and even adults for that matter, even though I may not agree with him on everything, than even many Christians, who are classified as the intellectuals, who in many of our Christian colleges and universities, deny the verbal, plenary inspiration of scripture, and who have adopted an acceptance of not just the oec vs yec, but Darwinistic Evolution. That my friend has no Biblical basis, even though it may come across as being intellectual. Criticize them if you want because you disagree with their arguments or convictions, but you do them a disfavor by referring to them as non-intellectuals. I doubt you'd do well against them in debate. And please, don't be suckered into being defined as intellectual as the world defines it or accepts it. I'm sure you are well aware as to what the Bible has to say about the wisdom of the world. Thanks for allowing me the time. By the way, I have no vested interest in either David Barton or Ken Ham.

David Barton has filed a defamation lawsuit against Judy Jennings and Rebecca Bell-Metereau, two former candidates for the Texas State Board of Education back in 2010, and a writer named W.S. Smith, who wrote an article on examiner.com titled “Exposing David Barton,” also back in 2010.

Barton is going after Jennings and Bell-Metereau over a YouTube campaign ad that said he has spoken to white supremacist groups (which is true), and Smith for calling him an admitted liar, referring to that list of “Unconfirmed Quotations” he put out after being called on his use of spurious quotes. What nobody can figure out is why Barton is suing these particular people, who haven’t said anything that hasn’t been said many times before over the years by other, much more well known Barton critics.

David Barton also has said The Scalps Of Republican State Senators Who Voted For Gay Marriage In New York ‘Should Be Hanged On The Gallery Rail’

David Barton once advocated that Thurgood Marshall be removed from the Texas state text books and that Martin Luther King, Jr. got too much credit as a civil rights leader.

Hamm and Barton, are not the loose nuts that you want to portray them as, and I am surprised that you attemt to do so.

I get your criticisms of Brunson, and Caner, and even the Holy Land hullabaloo. Some of the points that you make are valid.

I don't get this.

I am surprised that you seem to embrace the secular and liberal criticism of those men, assuming the secular critics and the liberals are intellectuals and that Barton and Hamm are not.

Christians do not think like the world thinks, and should not, but that doesn't mean they don't think. Because we reject secular ideology, doesn't mean that our thinking caps have been put off. The world thinks that Christians are idiots for trusting Christ and believing the Bible. They are certainly going to think that any evangelical who points to the Bible as a source of authority over science is going to be stupid, that should be no surprise; but neither should that mean the secular "intellectual" is more credible.

There are countless critics of Barton's work. When you look at the documentation that he has, it (being his claims) cannot be disputed.

Nearly every claim that I have ever heard Barton make, he has documentation for. Why is that hard to accept?

The interpretation of those facts may be debated, but the writings of the founding fathers cannot be denied.

His critics cannot deny that he has the documents, because he does. They deny what those documents mean. Barton points out what they say, and puts them in their historical context.

You seem to want to place more credibility on secular people who believe Christian scholars can't be scholars, than you do the Christian men who try to present honest facts; Biblical and historical.

It seems that you want to disenfranchise Christians who hold to traditional values, and reject liberal thinking; and cast them all off as nuts. I don't know if that's what you are shooting for, but that seems to be what you're hitting; at least to me.

"As head of downtown Jacksonville’s landmark megachurch First Baptist Church,Brunson already wields some scary influence. This is a church, after all, whose pews are stocked with elected officials and media types, and whose previous leaders have made headlines for baiting Muslims (calling the Prophet Mohammed a “demon-possessed pedophile”) and offering political endorsements based on which candidate was the “real Christian.” But Senior Pastor Brunson has led the church into a terrifying new era, where dissent is not only prohibited but punished in Byzantine ways. After a disgruntled longtime parishioner began criticizing Brunson’s management from the anonymity of a blog, Brunson had a member of his security detail — who was, handily, also a detective with the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office — open an investigation into the mystery blogger. Though the officer could uncover no wrongdoing, much less substantiate Brunson’s claim that the blogger posed a “threat,” the cop outed the blogger’s identity to church officials anyway. Brunson in turn sent him a trespass warning and banned him from ever attending the church again.

Brunson’s Big Brother tendencies revealed themselves again two days before the November election, when he invited church member and mayoral candidate Mike Hogan to kneel at the front of the packed auditorium while he lay hands on him and prayed for “godly leadership.” He also reminded his 28,000-member flock to be “good citizens” and “go and vote” (watch it here: http://bit.ly/nhS77L). In this case, it appears, God’s will and Mac Brunson’s were not one and the same. But being wrong doesn’t make his self-righteousness any less scary."

"Historians have documented that every single right set forth in the Declaration of Independence had been preached from the American pulpit prior to 1763. You know what that means? It means the Declaration of Independence is nothing more than a listing of all the sermons we had been hearing in church for the 20 years leading up to the American Revolution." David Barton's Revisionist History Lesson at FBC Jax, 9/11/11

What exactly are you disputing?

Are you saying that historians have not documented that every single right set forth in the Declaration of Independence was preached in the American pulpits?

OR

Are you disputing what he says that means?

AND if it doesn't mean what he says that it means then what do you say that means?

Jeff and Ed and various anons - the problem I have with Barton and Ham and their pastor friends is that they push their beliefs as doctrine. If you don't believe in YEC, then you are an evil liberal, and believe in Darwinian evolution. You saw a few posters here do that. I agree with Robert Jeffress - I don't think the earth is 10,000 years old. But I don't know, I wasn't there. So I won't push my views as doctrine in the church and neither should Ham.

A Christian who does not buy the YEC theory does not mean they are liberal, or that they don't believe the bible to be the word of God.

I do not care if someone believes YEC, or they believe what Barton is selling as "history". What I am concerned about is pastors bringing these men into their pulpits to "preach" their views as gospel truth, as doctrine which people must believe as part of their faith.

But I will say that when I see Barton ranting about "principalities" in the video, my Kool Aid detector pegs in the red.

Ken Ham, in my opinion is a rude, mean individual who has made a habit of implying, that those Christians who disagree with him, like the gentlemanly Hugh Ross, are probably heretical. He has done this so frequently that he has now been disinvited from two homeschool conferences due to his accusations against fellow Christians.

if you read his site, as I have, you will find that he says that this is not about the age of the earth and everything to do with denying the doctrine of the atonement. He has an article written with that title. (It's Not About the Age of the Earth).This means that it you don't toe the line with him, you are outside of the Scripture and might be denying the basic doctrine of the faith.

Ken Ham is not trained in the sciences beyond a basic undergraduate degree in biology.Also, the vast majority of Christian scientists believe in an Old Earth. Why is this? Are they all deluded?

I recommend that you investigate such Christian sites as Answers in Creation or Reason to Believe to learn the truth about AIG.They take on the "science" presented in AIG, point by point and offer alternate, scholarly and peer reviewed alternatives.

Creationists and evolutionists have the exact same evidence to look at for consideration; so do Young Earth Creationists and Old Earth Creationists. Faith in interpretation of the evidence decides the matter for each. It's as dumb for YECs to talk down to OECs as it is the other way around, isn't it?

Anything is possible--look around; not everything is probable, and that fact will have to decide in most conversations it seems.

Dawg speaking of a non-sense thread, what is this about? Are you against speakers coming in to churches? Are you unhappy about the teaching? If you have something worthy to say then do so without haphazard in your comments.

I will have to say one thing that you and Deb are doing is not really making sense out of Ken Ham and David Barton. I have personally found sanity in understanding aspect that is found in Darwin's Black Box and a young earth view. Strangly, I never arrived at a young view from the Bible view until it hit me about oxygen and carbon dioxide. God had to make to make animals and plant simultaneously. Are you not being anti-intellectualy yourself? Please quit being accusatory about Ken Ham, what has this guy ever done to you? Now be aware that your arguments of David Barton is not accurate either. He is not a revisionist rather his error is in being a reconstructionist. Do you have access to every historical document like he does? His library has every historical document and I know this for a fact. When I say his error is of being a reconstructionist is that he believes that in being a Christian nation is in the basis of documents. Francis Schaffer did not hold such a view. Rather he held to the idea of the consensus of the population. Are you going to retract bloated statements or sound like those who you criticize? I have written Barton on this endorsement on Copeland as well. Copeland does not fall in line with the Didache. Barton sought to defend him when Senator Grassley confronted the issue of televangelists as abusing the tax system. I wrote him and admonished him in not realizing that the Constitution did not give such ministers the right to exploit people but Barton did graduate from Oral Roberts. America does have somewhat of a Christian heritage but moreso one of religious liberty.

What is your issue with 10,000. There is more evidence for this then you realize. Are you calling those who hold this anti-intellectual? TO be honest I did not arrive to this from the Bible either. The fact remains that you have to have oxygen and carbon dioxide together for plants and animals. There could not have been progressively slow dimensions of time to make this work.

Bill, I'm flabbergasted that you're flabbergasted. I wasn't there when the earth was formed. I don't know if it was 10000 years ago or a million years ago. The bible doesn't say. But you've helped make my point perfectly. The age of the earth has been made a primary doctine against which one's devotion to God and the Bible is measured. How sad.

October 26, 2011 12:17 PM

The only time OE becomes a problem is when they deny that Adam and Eve are literal people. And many OE Christians do. There is a guy that likes to pontificate on this over at TWW. He claims that like the parables, Adam and Eve are not real people but literary devices such as used in parables.

And this guy is a Baptist. This is the danger of OE and where it can lead.

But Ken Hamm is doing the circuit. He and Mohler are making YE a salvic issue. Which it isn't. But it does make money.

Barton has been known as something of a crank for quite a few years now. He used to be a big speaker at Amway conventions. Wonder if he still is? Someone here said they checked all Barton's teaching and it is true. I have to wonder what History they are reading. In fact, many in the Con Congress had been raised with the church/state mentality of the Anglican church with a few notable exceptions like Dickenson and Adams. The revolution was not about religious freedom but about economics using personal freedom as the foundational principle.

People tend to forget that the Puritans who came here for religious freedom soon after set up their own state church complete with punishments for not attending services! Or punishments for holding home bible studies!

Bill, I'm flabbergasted that you're flabbergasted. I wasn't there when the earth was formed. I don't know if it was 10000 years ago or a million years ago. The bible doesn't say. But you've helped make my point perfectly. The age of the earth has been made a primary doctine against which one's devotion to God and the Bible is measured. How sad.

October 26, 2011 12:17 PM

The only time OE becomes a problem is when they deny that Adam and Eve are literal people. And many OE Christians do. There is a guy that likes to pontificate on this over at TWW. He claims that like the parables, Adam and Eve are not real people but literary devices such as used in parables.

And this guy is a Baptist. This is the danger of OE and where it can lead.

But Ken Hamm is doing the circuit. He and Mohler are making YE a salvic issue. Which it isn't. But it does make money.

Barton has been known as something of a crank for quite a few years now. He used to be a big speaker at Amway conventions. Wonder if he still is? Someone here said they checked all Barton's teaching and it is true. I have to wonder what History they are reading. In fact, many in the Con Congress had been raised with the church/state mentality of the Anglican church with a few notable exceptions like Dickenson and Adams. The revolution was not about religious freedom but about economics using personal freedom as the foundational principle.

People tend to forget that the Puritans who came here for religious freedom soon after set up their own state church complete with punishments for not attending services! Or punishments for holding home bible studies!

Barton's assertion that most of the statements in the Declaration of Independence can be found in sermons preceding the document is historically accurate.

But that's no big surprise, as there was no separation of church and state in the colonies before the Revolutionary war, so preachers often dealt with topics of a political nature (as some still do today, on both the right and the left). It isn't like religion and political thought never have overlaps.

The conclusions one draws from the historical and scientific data can differ, and it's totally fair to call Barton's and Ham's claims into question and scrutinize their statements. But it's not really fair to say that Barton or Ham are anti-intellectual. (Nor to claim it's anti-intellectual to dispute the notion of man-caused global warming, as Giberson and Stephens did in their article.)

It isn't anti-intellectualism to have a different viewpoint or conclusion from someone, or even from everyone else. Our conclusions are always influenced by our presuppositions, and people aren't unthinking or stupid just because they start out with a different set of "givens".

Much better to say "You are wrong, and here is why" than to say "I disagree with you and more people agree with me, so you are an anti-intellectual." Name calling only serves to stifle debate and open discourse and entrench both sides in their current positions.

We spoke about David Barton over at the Internet Monk a few months back. He's a demogogue. I think of what Joseph Goebbels once said, "You tell a lie often enough people will believe it as the truth..."

Clicker

About Me

We're small, insignificant, and harmless. But we have a loud, piercing bark that seems to annoy those in mega churches the most. Not Kool-Aid drinkers, only fresh, filtered water, please; with Grape or Cherry flavoring from Walmart. "Let him alone; God hath bidden him to speak:"